Every man who paid last year, and will pay going forward, is hurt by this.
Bigly.
Good, maybe it will force some much needed change.
So if the person paying can no longer deduct it then does the recipient no longer pay taxes on it/
If they do this, I will retire 5 years early. It will not be worth working.
Incredible.
I didn’t know any stupid states still had alimony laws. High tax liberal states, I’m sure.
And for alimony to be a tax deduction? Even more insane.
That should be the first tax break eliminated.
Well, it’s not a value-added transaction, it’s just slipping money from one hand to another. It should either be taxable/deductible on both ends or neither. Otherwise, they’re collecting taxes on churning money as if it were ‘income’.
Agreed, this is a huge further shaft, generally to the male, in the divorce system which is already hugely skewed against the male.
Hell, since we’re doing our best to destroy the institution of marriage in this country, why don’t we just kill alimony?
Do we let the alimony payer pay alimoney with pre-tax dollars and tax the alimony recipient by treating it as income?
Or do we let the alimony payer pay alimony with post-tax dollars and let the alimony recipient get it tax-free?
The tax-man gets a comparable bite either way, so it should make little difference to the Feds.
Will the woman be taxed on the money?
If this is done, it must apply ONLY to divorce settlements reached after the law is passed.
Too hard to understand for Republicans?
Not a good idea. If they want more cash make the alimony taxable at the payers rate.
The only way I see this being a valid computation is that Alimony 'generally' flows from higher income to lower income. So you make the alimony payer unable to claim an adjustment against income, thus having a higher taxable income (AGI). The alimony receiver looks to still have to include the income so the net is that there is more income being taxed.
I think that this is more than a bit in violation of the basic concepts of our tax code. As a rule the emphasis has been that all dollars are taxed but only taxed once. Yes, this is not followed in the Estate, Dividend and Capital Gains but has been a background rubric in most of the other areas. Here for Alimony, the dollar would be taxed twice, a bad thing in my book.
"Congress is not empowered to tax for those purposes which are within the exclusive province of the States."—Justice John Marshall, Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
So patriots need to support state sovereignty-respecting primary candidates who will commit to making probably most (all?) federal tax deductions permanent.
In fact, patriots need to support candidates who will commit to express-laning a ConCon for the ultimate tax-reduction plan imo, repealing the 16th and ill-conceived 17th Amendments.
For those patriots concerned about a possible overthrow of the country by a pirated ConCon, note that the product of a ConCon is never a new amendment to the Constitution, but a proposed amendment that the states can either reject or ratify.
A good divorce lawyer has been putting in any agreement a clause saying that if the tax code changes, the alimony is adjusted.
Divorce is destructive of society. The government should not be favoring it...for the same reason it should not be favoring other things that are legal but destructive of society.
Factually incorrect, not surprising coming from Yahoo. Fact is, for many payors less than half the forced at the point of a gun alimony is tax deductible.
Not only do I pay taxes on the FULL amount that I NEVER GET TO SEE in the first place, the worthless EX pay taxes on it as ordinary income too.
The fed's are double-dipping.
And then (today) I only get to deduct about 40% of the alimony from my taxes, again for money I NEVER GET TO SEE in the first place.
OUTLAW ALIMONY.
Couples need to learn how to stay married.